5 ms·

Well, considering that this was from 3/21 and since then there have been further revelations that things have only gotten worse. Look at these pictures and tel

by phlux 16y ago

Well, considering that this was from 3/21 and since then there have been further revelations that things have only gotten worse. Look at these pictures and tell me if you think it is possible that a reactor core outside the containment would not have release material. http://cryptome.org/eyeball/daiichi-npp/daiichi-photos.htm http://cryptome.org/eyeball/daiichi-npp/daiichi-photos.htm Sure, we can speculate that it has not yet released 100% - and given the fact that refugees are being turned away for fear of contamination at hospitals, bodies from the Tsunami are too radioactive to be recoverable, and reports are stating levels that are just freaking scary - I prefer to err on the side of caution. I think that in such cases its bettr to assume the worst case as opposed to saying "its probably less than we think".

kenjackson 16y ago
I really haven't been following this too much. I've been using HN as my news source -- but last I recall from some threads a week or so ago was that everything was overblown and you'd get more radiation from eating a banana? Is it still the case and this is overblown or have things actually gotten bad enough that if you lived near the power plant moving further away might be recommended?
- jdp23 16y ago
  The Union of Concerned Scientists' recent 3-week update is at http://allthingsnuclear.org/tagged/Japan_nuclear http://allthingsnuclear.org/tagged/Japan_nuclear You might consider getting news from other sources as well. The Bulletin of Atomic Scientists has dailyish updates at http://www.thebulletin.org/web-edition/columnists/tatsujiro-suzuki/daily-update-japan http://www.thebulletin.org/web-edition/columnists/tatsujiro-... ...
lutorm 16y ago
Those pictures show the outer roof blown off by the hydrogen explosions. If you'd watched that Stanford presentation, you'd know that it's just a superstructure that essentially provides weather shielding. The fuel pools are deep in concrete in the actual containment structure. Sure, it looks bad, but you really can't tell at all from those pictures what's going on below. And where did you hear that "bodies from the tsunami are too radioactive to be recoverable"? That's such a fantastic claim that it definitely requires a citation. (Unless you refer to the plant workers that were killed. They may very well be contaminated, but that's inside the plant. We've known the radiation levels inside the plant have been high since it happened, no news there.) I'm not a nuclear apologist by any means, but I don't like such obvious speculation however way it goes.
- phlux 16y ago
  http://www.google.com/search?client=ubuntu&channel=fs&q=1000+bodies+recover+radioactive&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8 http://www.google.com/search?client=ubuntu&channel=fs&#3... Also, we are seeing reports, such as this thread of extremely high radiation - we already know that Japan was slow to report actual numbers and each report that comes out is something along the lines of "XXX times [whatever] levels" Look again at the last slide where is specifically says "into fresh air" I am not saying the pools are like backyard swimming pools with open exposure to the sky - but I would believe that if pretty every other report is claiming that radiation is very high there is clear evidence to show that being the case. EDIT: Try clicking the link and reading it, there are multiple articles that clearly state "Up to 1,000 bodies of victims of Japan's quake and tsunami remain uncollected in the exclusion zone around a stricken nuclear plant because of radiation fears." EDIT 2: please make an attempt to google fantastic claims if you don't believe them, and others should make it a point to link to sources when posting something that seems fantastical/really alarming.
  - deleted 16y ago
    [deleted]
    - phlux 16y ago
      Thanks for the guidance, however when one is commenting on the content of my post such in such a way to make it seem as though I am spreading FUD when they have failed to do even the most cursory check on the claim themselves, it is quite ok to point that out. If we are going to try an impose some sort of posting etiquette here on HN such as reminding me to discuss content rather than commentors then I suggest we remind people to make attempts to look into things themselves before hitting the down arrow and asking for sources of information that should be readily available to anyone staying abreast of the details surrounding the topic at hand via a simple google search.
      - deleted 16y ago
        [deleted]

by phlux 16y ago

kenjackson 16y ago

I really haven't been following this too much. I've been using HN as my news source -- but last I recall from some threads a week or so ago was that everything was overblown and you'd get more radiation from eating a banana? Is it still the case and this is overblown or have things actually gotten bad enough that if you lived near the power plant moving further away might be recommended?

jdp23 16y ago
The Union of Concerned Scientists' recent 3-week update is at http://allthingsnuclear.org/tagged/Japan_nuclear http://allthingsnuclear.org/tagged/Japan_nuclear You might consider getting news from other sources as well. The Bulletin of Atomic Scientists has dailyish updates at http://www.thebulletin.org/web-edition/columnists/tatsujiro-suzuki/daily-update-japan http://www.thebulletin.org/web-edition/columnists/tatsujiro-... ...

lutorm 16y ago

Those pictures show the outer roof blown off by the hydrogen explosions. If you'd watched that Stanford presentation, you'd know that it's just a superstructure that essentially provides weather shielding. The fuel pools are deep in concrete in the actual containment structure. Sure, it looks bad, but you really can't tell at all from those pictures what's going on below. And where did you hear that "bodies from the tsunami are too radioactive to be recoverable"? That's such a fantastic claim that it definitely requires a citation. (Unless you refer to the plant workers that were killed. They may very well be contaminated, but that's inside the plant. We've known the radiation levels inside the plant have been high since it happened, no news there.) I'm not a nuclear apologist by any means, but I don't like such obvious speculation however way it goes.

phlux 16y ago
http://www.google.com/search?client=ubuntu&channel=fs&q=1000+bodies+recover+radioactive&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8 http://www.google.com/search?client=ubuntu&channel=fs&#3... Also, we are seeing reports, such as this thread of extremely high radiation - we already know that Japan was slow to report actual numbers and each report that comes out is something along the lines of "XXX times [whatever] levels" Look again at the last slide where is specifically says "into fresh air" I am not saying the pools are like backyard swimming pools with open exposure to the sky - but I would believe that if pretty every other report is claiming that radiation is very high there is clear evidence to show that being the case. EDIT: Try clicking the link and reading it, there are multiple articles that clearly state "Up to 1,000 bodies of victims of Japan's quake and tsunami remain uncollected in the exclusion zone around a stricken nuclear plant because of radiation fears." EDIT 2: please make an attempt to google fantastic claims if you don't believe them, and others should make it a point to link to sources when posting something that seems fantastical/really alarming.
- deleted 16y ago
  [deleted]
  - phlux 16y ago
    Thanks for the guidance, however when one is commenting on the content of my post such in such a way to make it seem as though I am spreading FUD when they have failed to do even the most cursory check on the claim themselves, it is quite ok to point that out. If we are going to try an impose some sort of posting etiquette here on HN such as reminding me to discuss content rather than commentors then I suggest we remind people to make attempts to look into things themselves before hitting the down arrow and asking for sources of information that should be readily available to anyone staying abreast of the details surrounding the topic at hand via a simple google search.
    - deleted 16y ago
      [deleted]